Duck lab - had to look at pictures of ducks and categorize them then complete the in lab PDF

Preview

Summary

had to look at pictures of ducks and categorize them then complete the in lab assignment based on the pictures of the ducks...

Description

Lab 6-The Duck Lab-Take home Assignent Emalie Hayes B00743133

Table 1 The decided duck traits, criteria and range of scores used to determine the ornateness of each duck species. Trait

Range of scores

Criteria for scoring

# of colour’s the ducks have

0-infinite

How many different colour’s are presented on each duck (shades are not included)

Colour contrast of duck

0-5

0=0% 5=100% The amount of different colours on the face of the ducks

Complexity of each ducks mask

0-3

0=one colour, 1=two colours, 2=three colours, 3=four or more colours. The amount that each duck stands out from its enviroment

Table 2 Parasite, ornateness (male and female), and dimorphism scores for the duck species Blue-winged teal, Green-winged, Canvasback, Redhead, Greater Scaup, Harlequinn duck, Longtailed duck, Common eider, King eider, and Ruddy duck ID

Species

Name

1

Anas discors Anas crecca Aythya valisineria Aythya Americana Aythya marila Histrionicu s histrionicus Clangula hyemalis Somateria mollissima Someteria spectabilis Oxyura jamaicensi s

Bluewinged teal Green7 winged Canvasback 5

12

5

7

7

3

4

Redhead

5

7

1

4

Greater Scaup Harlequin duck

5

7

3

4

8

7

3

7

2

7

3

8

9

13

7

6

10

13

5

9

9

3

6

2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10

Long-tailed duck Common eider King eider

Parasite Score 1

Ruddy duck 8

Ornateness: Ornateness: Dimorphism Male Female Score 7 4 3

4. The advantages and disadvantages: Using colours to distinguish the different species of duck for our studying has many disadvantages and advantages. Some of the disadvantages of using colour are: many animals change colour through development, male and female species have different colouring, and slot of species tend to have similar or the same colours making it hard to be sure of the species when observing the ducks. Advantages of using colour though, are that some patterns and colours are unique and easily identified, as well colour is an easily mode of identification as it only requires the use of your eyes.

Using contrast as a way of distinguishing ducks can have disadvantages because it is a very subjective characteristic, just because one person believes for the duck has increase contrast doesn’t mean another individual will agree. As well, contrast can be hard to distinguish with just using your eye using a picture because you only have access to one angle of the duck, the other view of the duck being observed could have a completely different contrast. An advantage of using contrast as a means of observing ducks is that when a species is strikingly different from other species it is easy to identify said species. As well, this method of observation is quick and inexpensive.

Using complexity of the duck’s mask is an advantageous trait to observe because many duck’s masks are significantly different compared to other ducks, allowing for easy identification. It is also advantageous to use the complexity of the part of the duck’s body because it narrows down a large region of the different species, because most either have simple or very complex masks. A disadvantage of using mask complexity would be that if you were looking to narrow your search down and were comparing similar looking species with the same complexity of masks it would be hard to identify the different species.

Table 3 The estimated trait values for parasite and dimorphism scores for the two most recent descendants of each ancestor and the average of these traits. Node

Parasite

Score

Dimorphism Score

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8

Desc1 1.000 5.000 8.000 10.000 5.000 9.500 7.625 7.250

Desc2 7.000 5.000 2.000 9.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 8.000

Avg 4.000 5.000 5.000 9.500 5.000 7.250 6.313 7.625

Desc1 3.000 4.000 9.000 6.000 4.000 8.500 4.000 8.500

Desc2 7.000 4.000 8.000 11.000 4.000 8.500 7.250 6.000

Avg 5.000 4.000 8.500 8.500 4.000 8.500 5.625 7.250

A9

6.300

4.000

5.156

5.000

5.625

5.313

Table 4 Comparison of the sister taxa using Parasite and dimorphism scores and subtracting the scores to determine the differences. I 1 3 6 8 A2 A3 A5 A6 A1

vs vs vs vs vs vs Vs Vs vs

II 2 4 7 9 5 A4 A8 10 4

Parasite I 1.000 5.000 8.000 9.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 7.625 4.00

Score II 7.000 5.000 2.000 10.000 5.000 9.500 7.625 8.000 6.312

Difference -6.000 0.000 6.000 -1.000 0.000 -.0750 -2.625 2.313 -4.500

Dimorphism I 3.000 4.000 6.000 1.000 0.000 0.750 2.625 2.313 4.500

Score II 7.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 6.000 8.500 4.000 5.625 8.500

Difference 4.00 0.000 0.000 5.000 5.000 2.500 3.25 0.625 0.000

Difference in Dimorphism score

6 5 4 3 2 1

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

0

2

4

6

8

difference in Parasite score Figure 1 The PIC analysis of the dimorphism score differences on the y-axis and the parasite score differences on the x-axis. R² = 0.07054.

Table 6 Table of ANOVA values for the PICS analysis, the F value of 0.828 is significant. ANOVA df Regressio n

1

Residual

7

Total

8

SS 0.2659601 75 36.810428 71 37.076388 89

MS 0.2659601 75 5.2586326 73

F 0.0505759 18

Significance F 0.828488115

6. Results The PICS analysis graph had a negative correlation between Parasite score differences and Dimorphism score differences and the graph had an R 2 value of 0.07 (figure 1). My data failed to have a positive correlation due to when Parasite scores decrease the Dimorphism scores increase. The null hypothesis indicates there should be no correlation between parasite score and sexual dimorphism between duck species. The Significant F value of p value was 0.838 or 83% (table 6).

8. Discussion The graph showed a negative correlation between parasite score differences and dimorphism score differences with a probability and significant F value of 83% (0.838) (table 6). Therefore, my findings are not significant. Due to this negative correlation, our data fails to reject the null hypothesis that there is no change in sexual dimorphism. It was assumed that there would be a positive correlation between the Dimorphism and Parasite scores because the Parasite score should have showed increasing strength in selection causing an increase in amplified male traits. When an amplified trait can only exist in a male or female it is recognized as sexual Dimorphism (Welsh E. 2017). Our results failed to meet these criteria because sexual selection was not stronger in species when the parasite scores were increased. The graph had an R 2 value was 0.07 and a R2 value of 0 indicates that traits being observed do not influence the population. Therefore, it can be assumed there was a decreased correlation within the relationship of parasite and dimorphism scores. Also, when observing the graph, it is obvious that the plots on the graph do not follow the mean line indicating again that there is a negative correlation between parasite scores and dimorphism scores. As well, when looking at the plots it is noticeable that two different species can have the exact same parasite scores but different

dimorphism scores (Welsh E. 2017). It can be then concluded from our discoveries that dimorphism scores are parasite dependent for our data. Table 5 Raw ornateness score data for each of the traits of the male and female duck species; Blue-winged teal, Green-winged, Canvasback, Redhead, Greater Scaup, Harlequin duck, Longtailed duck, Common eider, King eider, and Ruddy duck. Duck species

Male or Female Male

Blue-winged teal Greenwinged Greenwinged Canvasback Canvasback Redhead Redhead Greater Scaup Greater Scaup Harlequin duck Harkequin duck Long-tailed duck Long-tailed duck Common eider Common eider King eider King eider Ruddy duck

Blue-winged teal

# of colours 4

Complexity of mask 1

Colour contrast 2

Total Ornateness 7

Female

3

0

1

4

Male

6

3

3

12

Female

4

0

1

5

Male Female Male Female Male

3 3 4 1 4

1 0 1 0 1

3 0 2 0 2

7 3 7 1 7

Female

2

1

0

3

Male

5

3

5

13

Female

2

1

1

4

Male

5

3

5

13

Female

2

1

2

5

Male

3

3

3

9

Female

3

0

0

3

Male Female Male

6 3 4

3 0 3

5 0 2

14 3 9

Ruddy duck

Female

2

1

0

3

References

Welsh Elizabeth, 2017. Biology 2040 laboratory manual. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Dalhousie university...